“Madam Speaker, absolutely. I wish I would be given the time to give a full answer on it. When people go to the voting booth, they exercise their vote, and the names of the local candidates are on the ballot. However, to deny the fact that people vote for the leader of political parties, the party itself and the local candidate is to deny reality. At the end of the day, people contrasted our Prime Minister to the leader of the official opposition and others. Ultimately, the support garnered for the leader helped a lot of Liberal candidates get elected in the last federal election. With respect to time allocation, I can say to my friend opposite that Peter Van Loan, who sat two desks ahead of me, would do the same sort of thing. He brought time allocation over 100 times in the last few years of the Harper government.”
Statement grade
A+
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity.
Average 98 / 100
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Madam Speaker, Claims · 85 wordsthroughout the debate, I have heard the Conservatives make reference to, “Why do we need this bill at all?We already have existing laws.”It is really surprising to me, hearing that come from the Conservatives, considering they claim to be tough on crime and want longer sentences.In this bill, a simple assault committed due to hate would go from five years to 10 years in prison.1Sexual assault with a weapon causing bodily harm would go from 14 years to life in prison.2Reasoning · 18 wordsThis bill would provide for longer, appropriate sentences and appropriate punishment for those who commit crimes involving hate.The question · 11 wordsI want to know what the parliamentary secretary thinks about that.Positioning · 8 wordsAre the Conservatives even tough on crime anymore?Positioning
